Clinton Woods vs Carl Froch

[big lennox]

That would be a good fight.Who would people favour?

[Adamj1987]

well at LH woods because he'll be the bigger amn and a carrier LH at SM froch because woods would have to really drain to make SM and would probably be dead the the weight

[nobby_nobbins]

Clinton is a good all rounder but isn't really special in any department. He is also probably on the slide, despite his good win at the weekend. Froch, despite being smaller, punches harder and nothwithstanding his defensive slackness, is far more gifted, has a better engine and he has the spark and swagger of a champion that Woods has never had. Woods would go into a shell against Froch and probably get worn down for a late stoppage.

[Spud]

Woods would go into a shell against Froch and probably get worn down for a late stoppage.

Absolute b*llocks!!!

I follow both fighters and have nothing but praise for Carl Froch - I think he is a genuine world class fighter but naturally I think that of Clinton too.

Both fighters like to have a scrap - there would be no "fancy dan" stuff if that fight were ever to come off and I would actually argue although both can take a bloody good punch - Woods is the stronger of the too and would win a very very close scrap if the fight were made at Light Heavyweight!!! anything lower then I would favour Froch.

[n1ebf]

Woods would go into a shell against Froch and probably get worn down for a late stoppage.

Both fighters like to have a scrap - there would be no "fancy dan" stuff if that fight were ever to come off

lol "fancy dan stuff" ??...this is boxing you make it sound like some wimpy haircut in a pair of 150 pound football boots. Go on give me a couple of fighters you think are fancy dans so I've got an idea

[Spud]

Woods would go into a shell against Froch and probably get worn down for a late stoppage.

Both fighters like to have a scrap - there would be no "fancy dan" stuff if that fight were ever to come off

lol "fancy dan stuff" ??...this is boxing you make it sound like some wimpy haircut in a pair of 150 pound football boots. Go on give me a couple of fighters you think are fancy dans so I've got an idea

Please forgive the terminology!!!

Why not concentrate on the thread rather than my choice of words!!!

[whiskey]

Froch is a tremendous puncher (when not carrying a cracked rib) but would be giving away a couple of stone on the night.

Clinton would have to smother and maul Froch and use his size advantage, otherwise he will get outboxed.

[Spud]

Froch is a tremendous puncher (when not carrying a cracked rib) but would be giving away a couple of stone on the night.

Clinton would have to smother and maul Froch and use his size advantage, otherwise he will get outboxed.

I disagree - Carl likes a good scrap as much as Clinton - if they were to meet - they would meet in the centre of the ring and knock sh*t out of each other.

[svmsung321]

I presume the fight would happen at LH if it were to happen. Even tho Woods is not a particularly fantastic puncher, he's got/had the skills to beat the likes Glen Johnson, so i see Froch being no real problem, power advantage or not.

[teddy007]

Woods would go into a shell against Froch and probably get worn down for a late stoppage.

Absolute b*llocks!!!

I follow both fighters and have nothing but praise for Carl Froch - I think he is a genuine world class fighter but naturally I think that of Clinton too.

Both fighters like to have a scrap - there would be no "fancy dan" stuff if that fight were ever to come off and I would actually argue although both can take a bloody good punch - Woods is the stronger of the too and would win a very very close scrap if the fight were made at Light Heavyweight!!! anything lower then I would favour Froch.

Clinton Woods is one of the worst world champs britain has had in the last 20yrs. Froch would be too much for him. Anyone in the domestic LHW devision should look at woods and think if he can do it then there is no reason I cant. He is so limited but has a big heart.

[hitman09]

Woods would go into a shell against Froch and probably get worn down for a late stoppage.

Absolute b*llocks!!!

I follow both fighters and have nothing but praise for Carl Froch - I think he is a genuine world class fighter but naturally I think that of Clinton too.

Both fighters like to have a scrap - there would be no "fancy dan" stuff if that fight were ever to come off and I would actually argue although both can take a bloody good punch - Woods is the stronger of the too and would win a very very close scrap if the fight were made at Light Heavyweight!!! anything lower then I would favour Froch.

Clinton Woods is one of the worst world champs britain has had in the last 20yrs. Froch would be too much for him. Anyone in the domestic LHW devision should look at woods and think if he can do it then there is no reason I cant. He is so limited but has a big heart.

x2

[nobby_nobbins]

If Clinton Woods were an ice cream he'd be vanilla. Just a good, honest hard-working pro, but with little or no flair. When in against someone who does have flair, he seems to accept his fate and become a docile punchbag.

[teddy007]

If Clinton Woods were an ice cream he'd be vanilla. Just a good, honest hard-working pro, but with little or no flair. When in against someone who does have flair, he seems to accept his fate and become a docile punchbag.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Clinton would be too tough and too strong. Clinton has a granite chin and is a genuinely hard man who would have just a little bit too much for Froch at light heavyweight. I always thought Clinton would have a better chance than people thought against Calzaghe too.

Tarver has very good boxing skills when he chooses to use them, and Clinton was clearly overawed by the occasion. I don't think he would feel the same way about fighting Froch.

[THEBUTCH]

Froch would beat Woods at either weight. For me it would be question of how Froch chooses to do it. The easy way or the hard way. Good fight while it lasts


Please give Woods his due respect. He may not flick everyone's switch, but his achievements and calibre of opposition speak for themselves.

[stujones]

I think Froch will be to youthful for Woods, have to much down the stretch. I don't see a toe to toe war at all. Thats what Woods needs to do, but he likes to box. He needed to go to war with Tarver, but he elected to try and jab and essentially let Tarver be more aggressive.

[Finch]

Froch, has a better engine

Woods must be unfit then because Froch was blowing hard after three rounds with pascal.

And to think he'd be able to cope with Calzaghe's workrate.

[Spud]

I think Froch will be to youthful for Woods, have to much down the stretch. I don't see a toe to toe war at all. Thats what Woods needs to do, but he likes to box. He needed to go to war with Tarver, but he elected to try and jab and essentially let Tarver be more aggressive.

Completely disagree - Clinton loves a fight - the thing that went wrong in the Tarver fight was "Everything" - from the training, lead up, and the fight itself and to a degree one or two things went wrong after - but that is now in the past and for me and my opinion Clintons best chance is going to war with people - when he got to Muriqi on Saturday the Kosovan did not like at all as other opponents have found too.

Woods would ensure Froch dug very deep indeed - I will concede I can see why Froch would be favourite in many peoples book - but the heart is ruling the massive head here!!!

[Chambers2]

Froch, has a better engine

Woods must be unfit then because Froch was blowing hard after three rounds with pascal.

And to think he'd be able to cope with Calzaghe's workrate.

What a 3 rounds of action they were!! I seem to remember Froch coming on strong and dominating the second half of the Pascal fight, was I mistaken?

[stujones]

I think Froch will be to youthful for Woods, have to much down the stretch. I don't see a toe to toe war at all. Thats what Woods needs to do, but he likes to box. He needed to go to war with Tarver, but he elected to try and jab and essentially let Tarver be more aggressive.

Completely disagree - Clinton loves a fight - the thing that went wrong in the Tarver fight was "Everything" - from the training, lead up, and the fight itself and to a degree one or two things went wrong after - but that is now in the past and for me and my opinion Clintons best chance is going to war with people - when he got to Muriqi on Saturday the Kosovan did not like at all as other opponents have found too.

Woods would ensure Froch dug very deep indeed - I will concede I can see why Froch would be favourite in many peoples book - but the heart is ruling the massive head here!!!

I agree, thats what Woods needs to do and thats what Woods is best at... but sometimes he prefers to box, the first two Johnson fights he let Glen "be first"

For me, Clinton's best performances were back in the day when he was EBU champion against Ashley and Klemensten - when he came forward and took it do them. He's a good all rounder, but a better come forward fighter than he is a jabber. Obviously, you know him personally so I don't know what he says but I get the impression he prefers to box as he did in the first Gonzalez fight, and as he tried to do against Johnson. Work everything off the jab, if an opening comes then off course he goes for it... but he seems to prefer to wait for an opening to come, rather than force the opening (as he did in the Ashley/Klemensten fights).

Woods would need to use his superior strength, cause I don't know if he has speed advantages. No forgone conclusion for sure. I think they are very much on the same level and its a 50:50 fight... maybe the Woods of 2006/2007 - vs Froch 2009, I would have shaded to Clinton. I think they are very evenly matched... similar speed, similar size (I would think), sound chins. Woods is better defensively, Froch probably has a little more power.

I look forward to seeing the fight on Sat.